Nope, I just think the idiots here are idiots (not that everyone's an idiot, but the idiots are, by definition).

How do cars wash their headlights? How do gliders do it? How do in-flight de-icing systems work?

THe point is some idiot asking a stupid question with 1,000,000 answers can't think of any of the answers, so he assumes the answer is hard. It isn't. Doing it cheaply, reliably, and with no weight may be harder, but those are implementation details, not big picture.

Everyone I've seen selling IoT things have been selling "non-Internet connected network of things that we call IoT because that sounds cooler". The IoT is when the devices are connected to the Internet. Not when they are connected to a proprietary private network owned, controlled and managed by a single company, and "Internet" access is through a paywalled proxy. My home power meter is "IoT" and there is no way to access it from the Internet, directly or indirectly. Though the reports the power company pulls through their closed and private network are shared time-delayed in emails and paper reports sent out.

Similar are the mobile-phone network IoT car-based devices, a number of which will "IoT" when back at base, through secure WiFi to a private server, with no data in the loop *ever* traveling over the Internet (unless the customer buying the solution goes out of their way to send things over a WAN, that's still not Internet connectivity, just using the Internet for a private WAN).

The level of control around IoT at the moment prevents any IoT from working over the Internet. The IoT is when every device in your house is connected (probably IPv6, with a /56 for your personal items), and you can reach your own stuff from anywhere. When the "lock your door remotely" is app-based and locked into your Samsung phone, and Samsung home server, and lock from a short approved list that pays Samsung (sorry, the last IoT home demo I saw was one of Samsungs), that's not IoT, that's a Samsung home automation solution.

Given that most cars are automatics, there's no need for a tach anymore.

And the tach should be on the HUD, a bar at the top of the windscreen running from right to left that turns red at 90% of redline, and flashes at 100% of redline. The reason the tach is front and center (and big) is so that you don't have to look at it. Your peripheral vision can pick up the location with sufficient accuracy for timing shifts and such. The speedometer should be in the same spot so you can watch the road with peripheral vision while staring intently at the speedo to determine whether you are just before or just after the desired speed.

It needs to be huge because the 0-200 mph speedos (if it's on your speedo, your car can do it, right?) have the hashes from 0-70 take up about 1/3 of the usable space (which is of about 2/3 of a circle). As bad as NMSL was, at least 0-85 MPH speedometers were useful for helping you decide if you were on the legal or illegal side of 55, without having to break out a protractor. Though, that doesn't apply to Porsche and a few others that kept the same 0-200 speedo, but didn't print numbers or hashes on the last 2/3.

That's an assumption on your part. Sure, it may be implied, but isn't confirmed. I've seen places large enough that their OS provider would test on their behalf. So he can claim "no testing" and the answer is it was tested. Well tested. I've seen it done before.

Same way as many cars wash their headlights? There are piles of answers to the question. A temporary surface used for takeoff that's retracted after takeoff, removing all the bugs with it.

I can think of 100 ways to solve this, so when people make it sound hard, that just proves they are dumb. Yes, not all are good, and at most one would be optimal, but give me a few million dollars, and I can make more headway.

it's long, straight, and round. What level of lift does it provide? http://www.airliners.net/aviat... and other sources indicate it's trivial.

So? If that's the only requirement, then the fuselage should be pitted, yes?

Yes, but golf balls travel further because they are turbulent.

The problem with this is why the person doing the study is important. If, when you get 10 MPH over the limit, the windshield pops up a huge warning message, that's bad. But having the speed on the view 100% of the time, with the color of the display changing as the limit is reached, and passed, would give the same information and should make you more safe, not less. I could ask the same question and get opposite answers, depending on what I want to find.

The HUD that's augmented reality (overlaying IR on real view, so you see deer sooner and such), that should never be a distraction.

What is in the HUD that's distracting? Everything the ECU knows, displayed in Matrix style? Yes, distracting and not useful. But the tasteful HUDs? If they are distracting and intrusive, that's more a driver problem, not a HUD problem.

Nope that's the first time for the R5 (the world's thinnest phone, or was last I checked). The other times were for the Find 7 (which I own), which was, at the time of purchase, the highest pixel density of any phone, though others have matched QHD, but in a (smaller) 5.1 screen.

Just because I'm happy with my purchase doesn't mean I'm a shill. Just trying to make the point that you can't judge every smartphone by the iPhone or Samsung de jour. So many complain about a specific flaw in a specific model, then generalize. Yes, thinner can mean weaker, that's why Oppo made a video of the world's thinnest phone cracking nuts, cutting apples and watermelons, and being run over by a car. If you still think that thin means weak, that's your insanity, not reality.

And yes, I watched all the marketing material and read many reviews before buying the Oppo, since I hadn't heard about them until I was looking for a replacement for my S3. The marketing videos seem relevant to the complaints here.

I gave up on Samsung with the S3. Given the claims and the reality, it isn't worth my money to try again after something so por and didn't do what they said. But other Android makers of the day beat the specs and weren't lying about them. But good to hear you have good experience with your S6

No, it doesn't.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Hmm, thinner than an iPhone, and they drive a car over it. Though I didn't see a bend test, they seem to be implying it's strong.

They may be expecting an advantage to 1000 cycles, but have only tested to 200 because of the time involved, and released with 200, and are halfway to 1000 by now.

It's only your assumption that they aren't testing to 1000.

Stop using Samsung. My S3 sounds like that. But I switched to Oppo, and there's a world of difference. Put the phone in some reasonable power-savings for a weekend camping trip, and you'll be fine (at least I can do that with my Find 7). But my S3 wouldn't last 8 hours at work without a charge. Even if I never used it once in that time.

My Oppo Find 7 will run 3 days or so if the screen doesn't come on. That's with cellular on (And in range, I've never had it out of range, but my Samsung Galaxy S3 would last about an hour if you were out of coverage). And it has a fast charger, charge about 1% per minute, so it's usable at 1 hour charge every 2 days. I'm no longer tied to a charger, like my S3 which, even under very light use, couldn't last an 8 hour day without being charged, so it was plugged in nearly 100% of the time.